sw1mushfandomcom-20200215-history
Talk:Dac Civil War
Please refrain from making any posts to this article, especially if you are a player who was banned from the game. Many of the players who are driving the storyline in-game may not want ALL of the information to be publicized on the wiki yet. Updates should be made, for now, on the TP Progress page, and then only if you are a current player who has not been sitebanned. -- SW1 Kyle 23:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC) *Considering this article was deleted for delivering spoilers for a plot in progress, should I take the liberty to delete this, this, this, this, and this since they provided all the details that went into this article? Would seem weird not to. This article didn't provide anymore detail then what was delivered through your postings here. The only deviation this article made was further detail my ex-character's formulation of the original plan and nothing more. Also, I fail to see how the ending can be spoiled if the ending is open ended as the TP is suggested to be. I'll wait for your response before removing your articles which contain said spoilers. --Danik Kreldin 00:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC) For the love of everything holy Danik, please DO NOT put up wiki pages on current events that are happening. That is the task of those running it to do so, and takes away the GM's ability to bring about surprises in a TP. When they are ready, the information will be posted. Edits of what folks post is fine and adding info from when you were actually on the MUSH is fine. Recent events are not to be created at a whim by someone who is not participating in them. And as much as I love your zeal to bring this all together into one main article by looking through a few logs, I am respectfully ask that you refrain from doing so until the event/TP has concluded on the MUSH. --Nasa eagle 06:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC) * Danik, as you have already pointed out, the article for this already exists. Look at Operation Squid Lake. The page appears to be blank, but if you look at the Discussion page, you'll see an article in the works. I did it this way so that the average visitor wouldn't see the article as it is in the works, but so that we could actually work on the article. You'll notice it maintains the original title you gave it, and even gives props to Vextin for concepting the plot, and the discussion page is a work in progress anyway. So, there is absolutely no reason that this page needed to be created, other than what was quite clearly an attempt to give your former character more credit. As far as the roleplay logs posted, it's a clear understanding that any information in a role-play log is not to be considered IC information unless it was gained in-game through role-play. -- SW1 Kyle 13:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC) * I'll also note that your threat to delete articles sounds like an abuse of administrative powers to me. -- SW1 Kyle 13:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC) **I linked to that discussion page in my previous post. It's the first link. My point being that that page, included with the four logs, contain all the "spoilers" this page was declared to have (and the reason anon deleted it/blanked it out). So why can those pages contain the spoilers but this one can't? And I agree with you 100% that the information in the roleplay logs are not considered IC information - as is everything else on the Wiki (unless the character specifically knows the given information). That's been a rule since the beginning of the MUSH... you can't take information you read OOCly and apply it ICly. So a player reading your Operation Squid Lake article or the logs can't go and declare he knows that information ICly, and the same with this article. Now the whole point is this: if you don't want that information being available OOCly, then why did you post it in the form of logs and the Operation Squid Lake page? If you want to maintain the surprise and all, then there should be nothing at all on the Wiki. Now since the logs already existed and the aforementioned Squid Lake article, I saw absolutely no reason to not post this page since I figured it was acceptable to do as it had already been done. This page can't be deleted on the grounds of spoiling the plot if the other ones aren't - it's a double standard. ::Also, there is a reason for this page. The Dac Civil War is a specific, ongoing event. "Operation Squid Lake" is just the Imperial code name given to the project to start the civil war. Do we call the Battle of France (WWII) by the initial battle strategy, Fall Gelb? So they deserve two separate articles, or a merger under the Dac Civil War title, since the Dac Civil War is the major plot point and the major event in history. Furthermore, Republicans and non-Imperials involved in the plot won't be calling the event "Operation Squid Lake." Just Imperials. To the Quarren and Calamarian and the rest of the galaxy, it's the Dac Civil War... since a civil war has now fully erupted. What initiated it? Operation Squid Lake. So there needs to be some divide. ::I was going to suggest that Dac Civil War page contain some pre-war stuff (how it originated), but leave the bulk of it to the Operation Squid Lake page - hence why if you look back at the page history, you'll see it says See Operation Squid Lake for more information. Then it would go into the actual civil war as it progressed. ::And yes, I did mention my character more, but in the way it happened. If you read the article, all it says is that Mandor conceptualized the operation, gave it the code name, presented it to High Command, and then left the actual specifics and implementing to your character and ISB. Then Mandor dropped off after I was caught. Which is the way it happened - my only involvement in the plot was coming up with the idea and presenting it, but you're the one that implemented it. And that's all that the article presented. ::Also, it's not a threat, but an obviously sarcastic suggestion (also note how I said I'll wait to talk to you before doing anything). I just find it humorous that whoever blanked the page out did so under the pretense that it was giving out spoilers, while those pages you put up did the very same thing (and in more detail, given that they are the actual logs). I can't quite grasp the logic behind it. I understand if you don't want me posting about it, but saying it's spoilerish is beyond reason given the situation. --Danik Kreldin 15:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC) :- I'll point out that his deletion of articles is no way different than anyone else's ability to blank a page — the end result and resolve are the same — we can always revert it and/or bring it back. With that said, I also have to point out that TALK pages are not supposed to be used to construct frontline content. That's the purpose of subpages and project pages. Lastly, I will admit that this is a most atypical wiki (most are about things that have happened, while ours is being written "on the fly"), but that does not excuse it from its essential purpose — to be an encyclopedia. Even the granddaddy of them all, Wikipedia, tries to cover current events (and more often than not, falls flat on its face) to marginal degrees of accuracy. Hell, _I_ could have started writing an article regarding this series of events, and would I have been any more right or wrong? No. I would have been writing upon that which has been already published/known so far. But to keep hammering away that Danik has been "sitebanned" and thus cannot write anything is petty. One does not need a wizbit (thank God!) to contribute in a substantial way to this wiki. As far as the other arguments that are presented, such as "the event hasn't concluded yet", or "we don't want IC information to be used/misused in a further IC event", those make complete, logical sense and I would agree with you — as a rule, I typically don't post anything on Wikipedia or any of the other wikis I contribute to (or manage) until the whole event unfolds. But to mandate that "no posting of anything by anyone who has been sitebanned" is not your place to decree. -- Hawke / Rtufo 16:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC) *I agree with you on most of these points, Hawke, except one. Danik should not be posting on current happenings because he should have no access to current happenings. The reason he has been banned 3''' times now is that his presence is no longer wanted on the MUSH. The fact that he is commenting is a pretty good indication that he has again chosen to show his complete and utter contempt for the MUSH Administration and is going about more underhanded ways to violate that site ban. I mean we are in the 21st century, simple IP locks can't stop anyone really with the proliferation of anon proxies, redirectors and free sites. The option then comes to resort to more draconian measures or hope that the player is mature enough to understand that they are not wanted and move on. Honestly I think the Wiki just serves as an enabler that keeps said banned player from getting on with their life.--ImperialFH 16:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC) *You're right, Hawke. Danik can do as he damn well pleases here because he 'owns' this Wiki. But if this wiki is to be taken seriously as a resource for SW1, it's not exactly a good idea. And it is being taken less and less seriously. It is becoming rather more common to hear that nothing on the wiki can be taken at face value on the MUSH itself. The wizard-staff does not consider this site to be official. I tell the folks in my org to tread carefully here because some of the information is just out to lunch (and it seems to be an opinion increasingly held by the admin). So, yeah. If you all want this place to be taken seriously as a MUSH resource, it's going to have to be a little less rogue. And let's do a little math here... how much does a banned player running amok here really contribute to the credibility of this site? I know I wouldn't want him creating or altering articles about the CDU, so I can understand why the folks in this TP don't want him meddling here. --Mahon 05:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC) **Well, if I hadn't bypassed the siteban in the first place then there wouldn't even be a Dac Civil War plot. So keep that in mind. --Danik Kreldin 16:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC) ***That is completely irrelevant. Why keep devoting effort and time to a game that you are not wanted on? --ImperialFH 16:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC) ****Part of it is attachment. I spent a good portion of my life on SW1 and it's hard to cut that bond. Not that I'm nowhere near as involved as I used to be. Not even a fraction. Part of the reason I retired as AFH over a year ago is because of work, school and a relationship (as I think Aaargh was able to point out). So what time I "devote" to SW1 anymore is done after work and school, and when I'm not with my girlfriend, and in between anything else I do online. Which ends up being enough to write the occasional article and get in one or two roleplaying sessions. In all honesty, I think some part of it is spite. I'm a very stubborn person, I know this and it keeps me going. And, overall, I love the story. Always have and always will. I don't hate the game or even the people on it; there are some I don't like, obviously, but I don't let animosity get in the way of enjoying myself and contributing to the overall experience. The rest, I think, is that I'm kind of a bighead. A good portion of what SW1 is today has derived from my creative side - the blitzkrieg and the current state of galactic affairs. There was lots of character development and plot progression. So I don't like to see it go to waste and I enjoy continuing to take part and contribute - the Dac Civil War is a perfect example of that. So it is relevant, contrary to what you suggest. I came back as a new character, despite my ban, and did what I had always done before - contributed my part to the game experience. As Vextin I became a quasi-admin on the IPC and a Judge, and I made a good impression - and I all did was be myself. I did what I did best, and people are once again participating in a TP that I put forth. It's no different than when I was still AFH back in 2005/2006. So it's very relevant to why I continue to contribute. I like the game, I like the story, and people like you aren't going to ruin that for me. --Danik Kreldin 17:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC) ***The only person who '''ruined the game for you, was you. It was never a question of if you could be a good contributor to the MUSH. You always were good at coming up with indepth plots and getting people involved, even if your motives were always at least somewhat self-absorbed and self-important. That is not what got you kicked out of the Empire, it was the OOC BS that comes along with the good plot creator and such. The backstabbing and petty schemeing. What got you banned from the MUSH was hacking wizard accounts. That ban did not last more than 2 weeks before you were violating it, and I would imagine from your statements here that you are currently violating it again. So please, just move on. --ImperialFH 17:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC) ********I've never defended what I did with Doug because it's impossible to justify. I did it as a result of the backlash over the Vadim fiasco and I was too angry and upset to think rational. But I've always defended my actions against Vadim. I've always loved how the truth was spun to make our petition into a backstabbing, conniving plot to do something bad. I was told I was a traitor for working behind people's backs - but it defies logic. A petition is something you present to the opposing party in order to list grievances in a polite, diplomatic manner. And last I checked petitions were an acceptable form of protest on the MUSH. The only reason it was spun into a backstabbing maneuver was because I had yet to give Minkar the petition when everything went to hell. I was in the process of writing in collaboration with the 14 or so other plotters of the Empire. And if she even bothered to read it when I finally sent it, I'll never know - if she did, she might have realized how unaggressive and cordial it was. We were asking for our problems to be addressed in a civil manner - that was all. But no, the very thought of formulating a petition became immediately equal to backstabbing and rabble rousing. And all we asked for was for the Vadim issue to be addressed - at the time, the players involved did not like Vadim and wanted him removed from the game. That was it... nothing revolutionary, nothing beyond reason. The petition was our form of opening communication with Minkar - a petition is not illegal. How else were we to approach it? I was told I should have approached Minkar directly - but that's exactly what we intended to do, handing her a petition via @mail. How different is that? But no, the shit hit the fan, people's emotions ran high, they saw it as a threat, a backstabbing plot to attack their powerbase, and everything was squashed, nothing was addressed. The most telling moment of the entire debacle came the day after, when you talked to me in OOC land, telling me I should just give up and not proceed any further. You told me to "not be a martyr for them," them being the 14 or so players who signed their names to the petition. It spoke volumes to me and pissed me off in so many ways. It told me that Admin concerns were above those of the average player. I was fired, people refused to speak to me, some of the players who had originally signed on to it turned around in order to escape prosecution, and I was made the game's pariah. It was inexcusable. I shouldn't have did what I did after that (with Doug), but by that time I was too far overboard to think about it, and that was the end of it. But I'm not the only one guilty of going beyond reason and performing inexcusable actions. In short, no, I'm not going to leave anytime soon. Anyway, we should end this debate now. This isn't the right forum. --Danik Kreldin 17:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC) :- Yet you wonder why you are the pariah. You have absolutely no remorse for hacking Doug. You claim to be justified and that you wern't the only one who did inexcusable actions. I have to say that of everyone involved, you are the only one who did anything inexcusable. You created Vextin less than 2 weeks after being banned, that shows that even then you had no remorse for your actions. And you don't almost a year later. You have wrapped yourself in a victim's flag, you were not the only one angry over the petition, but you were the only one who took that anger to another level and did something that was plainly against the rules. That is why you were banned, that is the ban that you violated with Vextin and Brinaj, that is the ban that you are currently violating. So your alts will be found, and when they are, you will lose access to that means of connecting to the MUSH. So you will find another, make a new alt and then get it banned too, it is really a no-win situation. I hope you are happy with yourself. --ImperialFH 18:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC) *I said I wasn't justified in getting on Doug. No doubts there and I won't argue it. But the petition was justified and there was no excuse for the reaction to it. If petitions aren't allowed on SW1, then there shouldn't be a rule stating that petitions are allowed. We were prosecuted for following procedure. When someone has a problem with someone, you bring it to them - and one such way that SW1 offers is via petition. We were accused of conspiracy, backstabbing, and breaking the rules. It was ridiculous. If there had been a rational, well-intentioned reaction, then there wouldn't have been any problems. If the petition had been read and reviewed, and everyone involved sat down and discussed the issue in a formal matter, rather than calling me a backstabber and such, a good ending could have been reached - even if it was finally decided Vadim would stay, at least we would have had our voices heard and the decency to hear us out without acting like it's the end of the world. But that didn't happen and I found myself the target of slander and the ire of the community. And you're right - my reaction to it all was over the top and uncalled for, but you can't sit there and say we were backstabbers and assholes for having a different opinion of Vadim than you and the Admin. But you're wrong about no remorse - I did apologize to Minkar via e-mail, whatever good that did. --Danik Kreldin 19:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC) :-You reaped exactly what you sowed. But this is not a place to play ifs and buts, the past is the past and rightly or wrongly, it all happened. You said you apologized to Minkar, but your actions show a completely different story. It is one thing to say you are sorry over something and it is completely different to actually be sorry. If you were sorry, you wouldn't have created Vextin two weeks later. I honestly had no problem with Vextin, had you kept your mouth shut and just been content to be a player on the game. But you had to go start spouting about that you were Danik almost as if mocking the Administration that you were violating the rules. Just as you have been since re-creating a character after Vextin was closed down. If you were truly sorry, you would understand that what you did, regardless of why, was an offense that only has one consequence. You wouldn't be defiant saying that you will not honor the punishment for the action that you even admit was wrong. Eventually you might have found that the ban could have been lifted, Minkar is one of the most forgiving people I know and I doubt even the 'Doug Incident' would have lead to a lifetime ban, had you not done what you have done since to show that while you may say you are sorry, you have done nothing to prove it. --ImperialFH 19:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC) *I didn't spout I was Danik. I was really enjoying playing as Vextin. I had managed to work my way up to the IPC and Judge spot - and I was having fun. I had no intention of screwing myself over again. I told no one and didn't even consider trying to effect the status quo. I was going to play as Vextin and work my way back up the ladder, albeit under a different identity. Unfortunately, the proxies I used were crap. I'm sure you recall moments where I disconnected constantly, over and over, or disconnected during a scene and never came back. It was my proxies failing on me. There were days when the proxy list would be completely empty. It had a bad effect. I couldn't effectively manage scenes or even guarantee I would be available. Then for weeks the website had no proxies listed at all - it was just dead. I had no way of connecting. The only stable connection I got was in college, after or before class. But when the semester ended, I was stuck without anything. So I ended up telling Krieg over AIM the truth. I had been gone as Vextin for a long time at that point. I wanted him to know that I didn't just abandon him and the game. A part of me hoped that Krieg would see the good in me, too. A while later I ended up telling Lanil, and he ended up telling the admin. Like I said, a part of me hoped I could find some redemption through Vextin, but apparently not. Now if I wasn't sorry then I wouldn't have even bothered being Vextin. I wouldn't have bothered creating TPs and helping out like I used to. If I wasn't sorry I would have just tried to screw with everyone, or just stayed away all together. If I wasn't sorry I would have just abandoned the Wiki rather than continue to be one of its top contributors, or I could have been a complete dick and tried a way to ruin it as its creator. I did none of that because I was sorry. I wanted to show my good side. At this point it doesn't matter anymore. You know I've been on the game so there's no point in hiding it. --Danik Kreldin 19:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC) :-What bothers me is that you don't see creating Vextin was wrong. Nobody ever said that you couldn't be a good and upstanding member of the MUSH community when you tried to be. I even vouched for Vextin to be a judge. In the end, it comes down to this. You did something wrong and were punished for it. You have completely ignored and disregarded that punishment. The first step to redemption is facing the consequences for your actions. You have not done that, and until that happens, all of your protestation to wanting redemption is a wasted effort. --ImperialFH 20:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC) *I think the good I did on Vextin outweighs that. *shrug* So how do you propose I go about facing my consequences and earn some level of forgiveness? If I completely go away, and stay away, then I would be gone and have no chance of seeking redemption at all. I'd just be gone and how would anyone know I wanted to be forgiven? If you want to say I refused to oblige by my punishment, then so be it; at least I did it to do good rather than wreak havoc. --Danik Kreldin 20:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC) **You did do good as Vextin, I just want to be sure that I am clear on that point. However, it still doesn't change the fact that you used a proxy to get by a ban. I am not a Consequentalist, I don't believe that the ends justify the means, despite the fact that I am in charge of running the 'evil' faction. So to me, when the punishment is a 'ban' the only way to oblige the punishment is to not try and break the spirit of the law even if the letter is easy to get around. My suggestion would be to @mail Minkar who your alts are, and then just quit logging in, maybe for six months, maybe for a year. Show that she doesn't have to @newpass or add your new address to the site ban list. I wouldn't say step away from the Wiki, but a cold break might make things easier for you, and just let things be. After that time, you can Email her and ask for probation of some sort, and she may say no. But when the MUSH admin have to track down your alts and resort to proactive measures to uphold the ban, then you cause more ill-will despite the fact that when you try, you can truly be a good asset to telling stories. That isn't what is being questioned. This is all about integrity, and you need to prove that you have some. I don't intend that to sound as harsh as I am sure that it does, but it is the heart of the matter. --ImperialFH 20:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC) And now a word from our sponsor... CHEETOS (Xerxes) Not trying to dissuade anyone from their points of view or from continuing this spirited debate. I would ask that further comments be relocated somewhat. As, I see two separate and distinct issues in this thread, I suggest the following: #To the point about on-going plots and how best to deal with them on the wiki, the Forums seem like the right place. This is an issue of policy that has a broader scope than just this one article. #For those that wish to continue commenting on Danik's siteban, I suggest using his talk page. Time in. -- Xerxes 20:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)